Think that's worth a punt.

Who with?

England will need to keep Australia to around 8-12 points in order to stand a chance of winning,sadly I can't see this happening and that the Aussies will win by at least 14 points

They were only 15/2 to win the tournament before the Tonga game.
Virtually the same odds now.
You could always put sixteen pound on Australia to win a whole shiny pound.

England hasn't beaten Australia for 22 years (excluding GB). Australia hasn't lost a game for circa 2 years.

England will never win in a million years, right guys?

As an ex engineer I would like to see your calculations based upon the given data before deciding whether you're right or wrong.

I can see England beating them myself.

Regards

King James

Get the feeling they will target Bateman and gale again similar to the first game. Realistically England can't give away any soft tries like the first two in that game to have any chance.

So you would there is a plan to stiffen up that edge.

I expect the game to be tight for the first 30 minutes then Australia ping a couple of tries before H/T on the back of our mistakes. We will have a mini fightback but they will always be just out of reach and will crown the win with 2-3 late killer tries.

Aus 30-10 Eng

That's what my head says.

My heart says we CAN do it but I would rather we chuck it about and chance our arm than try to grind out a win - we have no chance of winning that way, IMO.

Amusingly the coach had taken us to near relegation with some of the direst rugby since long before Agar, my 'petition' of 2015 was it, (you remember better) was to vent my anger/frustration to the owner of my club, one I've followed/loved since a child. I wanted change because the coach was utterly clueless/dragging us backwards after baskstabbing the previous coach, binned off talent as an excuse for his shortcomings, publicly attacked/bullied his own players, accused the fans of being part of the problem and still hadn't brought through a single youngster from the ranks in 4 years to be a first choice XVII player.

We finally got together our best squad of players in 30 years, that only after the owner finally dug deep in his pocket with an over the cap squad did we luckily win something. In fact up until the Easter KR derby of 2016 most fans wanted Radford out because we'd shown no improvement, that comeback at the death against KR turned everything around for player confidence, a great bit of luck injury wise through the season and some improvements because we he had help from inside the club on coaching attack and some outstanding efforts by the players plus some improvement by him got us a bit of silverware.
Last year we went backwards, yep we had some outstanding CC games and deservedly won it, in the league though we were shocking in defence and up and down performance wise throughout with some absolute dross against Leigh and Hudds to name two.

But well done on diverting the thread

The final will be over as a contest inside the first 20 minutes - Australia are just too strong

There needs to be a balance. If we try and chuck it about too much we'll gift them field position. We need to complete early and get a foothold in the game. If we can stay within 6 points (if we aren't able to be ahead) then anything can happen as this is afterall sport.

Because most of the great Brazilian footballers are either dead or too old to play at a competitive level. I am talking about now.

English football and RU are the best funded in the world in their particular sport - how long since England won the soccer world cup? How well did England RU do in the last world cup? So your idea that money and participation levels lead to automatic success doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

NZ are as well funded as the Aussies i.e. all their players play in the same competition the NRL how come the Aussies are so far ahead?

The All Blacks come from a country with a population <5m yet they are able to beat England with a population 10 times the size - Australia like NZ in RU will always be a dominant force in RL no matter how many countries played the sport.

Same for Tonga, Italy, Samoa.......it's just that if you're Australian Born then you only ever want to play for the Kangaroos.....until you're overlooked and then you'll find a Grandparent who can make Pasta or who once drank a pint of Guinness......so the Kangaroos selectors get the first draft every time and the other nations get second best.

In the specific case of the Kiwis, they have been atrociously managed as a group in recent years and the defectors did untold damage to their hopes this time around, but at least they have won 3 of the last 10 v Australia....if you remove the Kiwis then the Kangaroos haven't lost a game against anyone else for 21 years.

Quote ="Call Me God"Same for Tonga, Italy, Samoa.......it's just that if you're Australian Born then you only ever want to play for the Kangaroos.....until you're overlooked and then you'll find a Grandparent who can make Pasta or who once drank a pint of Guinness......so the Kangaroos selectors get the first draft every time and the other nations get second best. In the specific case of the Kiwis, they have been atrociously managed as a group in recent years and the defectors did untold damage to their hopes this time around, but at least they have won 3 of the last 10 v Australia....if you remove the Kiwis then the Kangaroos haven't lost a game against anyone else for 21 years.'" news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 112502.stm

Quote ="Call Me God"Same for Tonga, Italy, Samoa.......it's just that if you're Australian Born then you only ever want to play for the Kangaroos.....until you're overlooked and then you'll find a Grandparent who can make Pasta or who once drank a pint of Guinness......so the Kangaroos selectors get the first draft every time and the other nations get second best. In the specific case of the Kiwis, they have been atrociously managed as a group in recent years and the defectors did untold damage to their hopes this time around, but at least they have won 3 of the last 10 v Australia....if you remove the Kiwis then the Kangaroos haven't lost a game against anyone else for 21 years.'" news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 112502.stm

England can beat Australia, but its a very low probability.

In defence we need to not miss tackles, and pressure Cameron Smith. Against Fiji he was doing what he did this year for the Storm, getting out of acting half and wandering around taking his time to pick a pass and effectively playing both hooker and first receiver. It added so much width to the Australian attack it was almost impossible for Fiji to number up. If he starts doing that our defenders at acting half have to chase him all game, and make him at least take tackles. He's a great player with an amazing engine, but he won't enjoy being knocked over every couple of minutes (not to mention it would take him out of the next play).

In attack we have to play with more variation. Gale and Brown are doing exactly what Bennett would want them to do as he likes to play with structure and use his full back as the playmaker out wide. We need to change things up - inside passes, short passes, dummy half runs etc to stop the Australian defence getting set. Oh and not drop the ball whilst doing that.

Realistically Australia should easily put 30 on us, and we'd be lucky to make double figures. I just hope Bennett has some plays or tactics up his sleeve which he's been saving for the final.

Probably not but we will turn up to play the game anyway.

Sorry...11 years.

That makes it so much better by the way.....Australia have lost 11, drawn 2 and won 79 of their tests this Century....SO MUCH BETTER

I think we've suffered for not taking Tomkins. That would have given us the option of having Widdop in the halves without losing the pivot at FB as favoured by Bennett. With Tomkins, Widdop, Roby & O'Loughlin through the spine there would have been enough creativity and threat to at least trouble the Aussies and give us, on a good day, at least a fighting chance. Big selection error once Hardaker self destructed for mine.

Unlikely but it would be the most Wayne Bennett moment ever for England to somehow pinch it. I just don't see us causing them enough problems though. Luke Gale looks sub-standard at this level.

Thankfully our owner had the insight and intelligence to give him some time and a shot.
Rewarded with our first ever Wembley victory, followed by backing it up and defending it this year, as well as going deep in the SL comp the last two seasons.
As Petitionmaster-hang-em-high-General, thank fook you were ignored as we could have all been on our @rses right now..



Had a flutter on England to win the competition before the semi for entertainment value as the price was about right.
Chances of a return on my investment?
[iS[/ilim, with a capital [iS[/i.

I didn't get the call at the time and I still don't now. As much as people love to bag him and plenty have enjoyed his injury struggles these past few seasons, he's still a better player then both fullback options we took and he'd do a better job in the halves then one or two who've been taken as well. There was a misconception that his form was poor when he came back last year when in fact he was pretty good. Statistically he contributed as many try's/assists combined per game (in superleague) as Hardaker did and way more then Ratchford and Lomax. His defensive capabilities are chalk and cheese to the player who moved to the NRL also. He's pretty solid at the back.

On the plus side he's having his first pre season in three years and I think that will have a big impact. I'd love to see him move in the halves for us next year because I think he could really make a big difference for England in that six shirt. In Widdop we've got our fullback for me. He's quicker then Sam Tomkins now and his off the cuff style suits the freedom he's getting. A 1,6 and 7 of Widdop, Tomkins and Gale or Sneyd could be very effective for us.

Senior, Pryce and Long v Whitehead, Widdop/Brown and Gale. That's the issue.

As to coach's up sleeve option. He will no doubt have something. Game 1 it was to failrly smash Cronk early. Trouble is he got up and got on with it.in the longer term it seemed to take more out of Sam Burgess than Cronk and we lost. I think we'd pressurise Slater if we had a decent kicker but we don't. That leaves Smith - but I think he's too good / solid to be effectively targetted.
That means we are left with the option of outplaying them. Not sure we gave either the ball handlers or pace to do that.

All I can say to every person on hear that thinks we can, or can not win is





for a win any sort of win will do me

I rate Widdop and Whitehead, but Gale/Brown have been turd. Don't think we need to discuss Senior vs Bateman playing centre!